Radeon R7 A360 vs GeForce GTX 970M SLI

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 970M SLI and Radeon R7 A360, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 970M SLI
2014
2x 6 GB GDDR5, 162 Watt
24.42
+1446%

GTX 970M SLI outperforms R7 A360 by a whopping 1446% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking239976
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.33no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameno dataMeso
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 October 2014 (10 years ago)5 May 2015 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2560384
Core clock speed924 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHz1125 MHz
Number of transistors2x 5200 Million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)162 Wattno data
Texture fill rateno data27.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.864 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data24

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2x 6 GB2 GB
Memory bus width2x 192 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed5000 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12_112 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.0
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA+-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD88
+1660%
5−6
−1660%
4K41
+1950%
2−3
−1950%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+2100%
2−3
−2100%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+1533%
3−4
−1533%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+1740%
5−6
−1740%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+2100%
2−3
−2100%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+1533%
3−4
−1533%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+1825%
4−5
−1825%
Fortnite 110−120
+1543%
7−8
−1543%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+1720%
5−6
−1720%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+1525%
4−5
−1525%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+1680%
5−6
−1680%
Valorant 160−170
+1500%
10−11
−1500%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+1740%
5−6
−1740%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+2100%
2−3
−2100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+1475%
16−18
−1475%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+1533%
3−4
−1533%
Dota 2 110−120
+1600%
7−8
−1600%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+1825%
4−5
−1825%
Fortnite 110−120
+1543%
7−8
−1543%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+1720%
5−6
−1720%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+1525%
4−5
−1525%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+1580%
5−6
−1580%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+1567%
3−4
−1567%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+1680%
5−6
−1680%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85
+1600%
5−6
−1600%
Valorant 160−170
+1500%
10−11
−1500%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+1740%
5−6
−1740%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+2100%
2−3
−2100%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+1533%
3−4
−1533%
Dota 2 110−120
+1600%
7−8
−1600%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+1825%
4−5
−1825%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+1720%
5−6
−1720%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+1525%
4−5
−1525%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+1680%
5−6
−1680%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48
+1500%
3−4
−1500%
Valorant 160−170
+1500%
10−11
−1500%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+1543%
7−8
−1543%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+1520%
10−11
−1520%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+1650%
10−11
−1650%
Valorant 190−200
+1558%
12−14
−1558%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+1500%
4−5
−1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+1633%
3−4
−1633%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+1867%
3−4
−1867%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+1800%
2−3
−1800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+1700%
3−4
−1700%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+2000%
2−3
−2000%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Valorant 130−140
+1563%
8−9
−1563%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1
Dota 2 75−80
+1800%
4−5
−1800%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+1900%
2−3
−1900%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%

This is how GTX 970M SLI and R7 A360 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 970M SLI is 1660% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 970M SLI is 1950% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.42 1.58
Recency 7 October 2014 5 May 2015

GTX 970M SLI has a 1445.6% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 A360, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months.

The GeForce GTX 970M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 A360 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI
GeForce GTX 970M SLI
AMD Radeon R7 A360
Radeon R7 A360

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.3 47 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 970M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon R7 A360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 970M SLI or Radeon R7 A360, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.